<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (11) TMI 1695 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191767</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, concluding that the disallowances under sections 40A(3) and 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act were not justified. The ITAT held that payments to brokers for hiring trucks fell under an exception in Rule 6DD(k) and that payments to truck owners for hiring trucks did not require TDS deduction under section 194C.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:52:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466334" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1695 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191767</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, concluding that the disallowances under sections 40A(3) and 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act were not justified. The ITAT held that payments to brokers for hiring trucks fell under an exception in Rule 6DD(k) and that payments to truck owners for hiring trucks did not require TDS deduction under section 194C.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>